The same line of solution seems available in the
ase of the
other passaijes. Thus in the passage Mt 12""', esp.
.."-s (cf. Lk
UUff., esp. v.M), a main element in thr- .ifr,.!^-' -
a:;ain the
element of attack. The Pharise.^ in-- i. H.i
... demons
may be subdued by the power - i i
1 prince.
Jesus answers that such a state i i '
...tivable.
Satan cannot wiHh to overthrow liis <,
il.e other
hand, the nniver )"■ the iin-.vernf (:,.,! i .. hascomein ell... i Ti..- -ir. „■ ,, ., .., ' r
II, of God
,. eot this
world and :.iill. i
1. red and
bound. AK.ni, ... . ... 1 ...
i...u is not
' i)icite/c/e«.;'. '.'..■'-..,....'".; '.'. .......'. ' ..'.■..'■.
/;.•„ Dokit.
inenten und hfi J.-sm, I'JUo.
ESCHATOLOGY
ESCHATOLOGY
, hilt the presence of the good in power. Finally, there are the parables in which the Kingdom is spoken of as something growing in the earth and therefore alreadj- planted. Note especially the parables of the Mustard- seed and the Leaven. Here, indeed, we are left to imagine the context in which the parables were uttered, as even Mark(436ff-) in this instAnce follows the topical method of Matthew, and relates the parables only as specimens of the didactic method of Jesus (cf. v.^). But may we not reasonably suppose, as in the other cases, the context of a certain antagonism? Timid followers come to Him with a difficulty bom of vision and re- flexion : ' If Thou art He with whom the Kingdom comes, why is the word of the Kingdom really received by so few who hear it, or how shall even the wonders of God done in one little land affect the whole world ? ' To which Jesus repUes in effect ; ' Have patience, and you shaU see.' The greatest things of the world are not always those that give promise of greatness. They are often those whose beginnings are remarkably small, and yet connecting beginning and end is the one power. If this was the occasion of the utterance of the parables under discussion (and it seems difficult even to imagine another), it is obvious that both the question of the doubters and the answer of Jesus assume that the constituent of the Kingdom is the supernatural Divine power before which no opposition can stand. The ques- tion is. Can the power really be present when there is so little to show for it? And the answer is. Yes. it can. The same power that begins with little ends with much. We read our own thoughts into the simple intention of these parables, when we speak as if Jesus intended to teach that the manifestation of the Kingdom would not be catastrophic, but would be a matter of growth and development. Doubtless the parables, taken by themselves, are capable of bearing this meaning ; but just this isolation of them from the general context of the situation reflected in the Gospel history is that of which we must beware. But there remains still what is, apparently, the most important passage, Lk 1720if.. Whether we translate 'in you' or ' among you ' (i.T»,- iuSt, v.21), Jesus seems to say very em- phatically that the Kingdom is present. On a nearer view of the passage, however, and a more careful articulation of its sentences, this appearance vanishes. V.^i must be under- stood in harmony with v,2yff- (cf. the ' lo, here 'and the 'lo, there' of vv.21 2;>). The leading thought of the passage is the suddenness (in the special aspect of simultaneousness) of the manifestation of the Kingdom. The advent of the great dav shall be like the lightning flash, of which you cannot say, • here' or * there,' for it is everj'where and all at once.
It thus appears that there is nothing in the Synoptics really antagonistic to the ' escliatological ' view of tlie Kingdom. Tlie Kingdom is not present in any .sense not reconcilable with tlie fact that it is also and mainly future. No one may understand the Gospels who cannot accept the fact that in a perfectly distinct sense the teaching of Jesus was not modern. It was in the highest degree sane and authoritative, yet it remained true to the traditional view that the Kingdom would come by miracle and catastrophe. The unmistakable indi- cations of this are the facts that the references to the Kingdom in the Synoptics are prevailingly of futuristic implication (on this see Wernle, op. cit.), and that even in the Fourth Gospel there are numerous passages to show that Jesus never thought of the Consummation apart from the transcendent wonders of the Resurrection and the Judgment.
There was, however, one important modification of the traditional view. The Consummation and nipai • ■ • ed b contained the promise of a Messiah. But the respondences of fulfilment to projihecy are largely contrasts, and the impressiveness of history is per- liajis mainly due to these contrasts. The efforts of tlie Evangeli.st Matthew to show— sometimes in stiaiiw'ly far-fetched ways— that Jcsii,^ fulfilled the pro,,ln-ir-. nrr :.n i^>tnl^,i^,. ,„ :, •„ ,,f ,1„. .iiffi- ciilli.- iVlt l,v ...,,.,, :!„■ u,..-' -,,n-,,M'. minded
JCNS^ U. lvr,,„ril,„_ Ih,. \].--r. . :. .,: J .„, .vith
the t.-tuininy ..f [....plMMy. Ii ].•...„■., - 1 i.iixirtant to inciuiro h(i\v in ,in csphatdlogical aspect Jesus conceived His own l\Iessiahship.